While I've always been skeptical of polls, based on my knowledge, this one isn't too bad.
Of course you would have to admit, if you read this blog regularly, I am a bit biased in favor of natural health care. My bias is because I know it works and I want all people to be able to have the option as their right of choice. Some will choose it, some will not.
Part of the problem lies with doctors who refuse to admit that non-medical treatment options offer hope and benefit.
Consider the Everett WA cardiologist in the Western Washington Medical Group who was exceptionally rude and disrespectful to a client of mine who was there for an evaluation of her condition.
I gave her a medicalarticle addressing the effective use of three supplements for heart conditions.
This doctor refused it and instead of looking at it and taking it for further reading, threw it back to her saying "I don't know anything about this, and it's not proven."
The same attitude prevails withe the cancer industry and the providers who adamantly adhere to false knowledge that supplements, nutritional, herbal and other treatments
do not work for cancer or interfere with the slash and burn techniques of chemo and radiation.
The best one I've hear came from a client taking chemo in a Lewiston, ID medical center. She was told not to eat broccoli because it would interfere with the chemo.
Now my take on that is that, yes, it interferes for the better because the brassica family of foods, of which broccoli is a member, is anti-cancerand so you would ultimately be able to get a better effect and possibly take fewer treatments.
For the 9.6% that stick with what they believe is 'proven', it might help them to know that it really isn't. The current methods are just what is used, and the real effective rate of cure is about 2%. It's the old rule, "we've always done it this way so we will keep doing it this way" mentality. After all, it is a cash cow first, and maybe a few might survive the damage. Survive the treatment's damage? Maybe that's good is you move on to a life on a lot of drugs to keep living in a compromised state.
What concerns me is the misunderstanding shown in the last section of questions. The majority of supplements are already proven to be safe and effective. The science is there. It's just that the consumer never hears about this body of knowledge.
And media outlets like MSNBC fail in their mission to give you the facts. Maybe Dan Abrams or Keith Olbermann will read this and call me to explain.
So, if 52% of those questioned would try something different, or 41% keep taking supplements it is a good thing. Then, I think the dinosaurs of the AMA and mainstream medicine should get going and read up on some of the proven studies, get a second opinion from me or take some of my classes.
Media pollsters can do the same.
52% Would Try Alternatives Over Chemo
MSNBC, 9 August, 07
Would you be willing to try alternative medicine for a serious health condition?
*3637 responses
Yes, I'd try an alternative therapy before undergoing something proven but unhealthy, such as chemo.
52%
I might supplement my doctor's suggested treatment with natural medicine.
33%
No. I'm sticking to what the medical community has found to be tried and true.
9.6%
I'm not sure.
5.3%
Do you take dietary supplements, including herbs and vitamins?
*8457 responses
Regularly
84%
Occasionally
8.8%
No
7.7%
Will the FDA's new manufacturing standards for supplements change your mind on the products?
* 8420 responses
Yes. At least now I'll know they contain what they promise and aren't contaminated with something scary.
45%
No. I already trust the supplements I take, so this won't make a difference to me.
41%
No. Makers of these products still don't have to prove they do any good. I'll keep steering clear.
6.3%
I'm not sure.
7.8%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19371372/
No comments:
Post a Comment